LG offering $25000 prize to anyone with higher Wh/W than the LG300N1T-G4?!

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • DanKegel
    Banned
    • Sep 2014
    • 2093

    LG offering $25000 prize to anyone with higher Wh/W than the LG300N1T-G4?!

    http://www.ecogeneration.com.au/pdf/...G_2016_web.pdf contains a curious challenge, open to Australians for another two months.
    Here's the next in full:

    "The LG challenge is on again!
    We will reward you up to $25,000 if you can beat the LG NeON™2 BiFacial*
    LG believes the NeON™2 BiFacial 300W is the highest output panel in a watt by watt equilised comparison in Australia.
    In 2015 LG put out a challenge to anyone who could beat our NeON™; no one was able to do so. In 2016 LG tested the NEW NeON™2 300W BiFacial (LG300N1T-G4) against 19 competing panels, in an LG commissioned system with Solar Edge optimizers in Sydney’s Frenchs Forest. The impartiality of the comparison system was independently verified by a qualified engineer, certified as an authorised PV systems expert by one of the world’s leading testing facilities, TUV Rheinland. The NeON™2 300W BiFacial panel created more electricity than any other panel, some competitor panels produced 15% less electricity than the NeON™2 300W BiFacial (watt by watt). We are so confident that the NeON™2 BiFacial 300W produces the most electricity in a Watt by Watt equalisation of any panel sold in commercial quantities in Australia that we will pay an equal share of $25,000 to any entrant who sets up an alternative Solar Edge comparison system in a mainland capital city in which any non-LG solar panel available in commercial quantites in Australia produces an equalised output exceeding that of a NeON™ 2 BiFacial panel installed in the same system, over a period of at least 3 consecutive months.
    *TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Entrants must be solar installers accredited by the Clean Energy Council. “Challenge Period” is 3 consecutive months of continual operation during the period 15 August 2016 to 15 January 2017. Entries are to be made prior to the challenge commencing by email to solar.sales@lge.com.au and close at 5:00 pm EDST on 14 October 2016. Each comparison system may be the subject of only one (1) entry. LG reserves the right to verify the conformity of systems and comparison data with these conditions, including site visit at any time before, during or after the Challenge Period. Comparison system must be installed in or near a mainland capital city in Australia or at an LG agreed regional location. Comparison system must incorporate a Solar Edge inverter and optimizer combination installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. Panels in comparison system must be available for sale in commercial quantities in Australia at date of publication. The Prize ($25,000) will be paid in equal shares to all entrants who satisfy LG that a non-LG panel in their comparison system has produced an equalised output exceeding that of a LG NeON 2 bifacial panel model LG300N1T-G4 installed in the same comparison system and installed under the same conditions during the Challenge Period. The “equalised output” of a panel means its energy output (Wh) divided by its manufacturer’s supplied flash test result (W) for each panel in the system (which LG must be able to verify). Equalised outputs of panels must not be manipulated, or interfered with, or impacted by unfair irradiation advantages for any panel or other conditions like overshadowing. The Prize will be paid on 28 February 2017, after any validation and verification that LG requires in its sole discretion. LG may at its sole discretion disqualify any entrant who it is not satisfied has conformed to these conditions. For full terms & conditions see: ..."

    The "equalised output" is our old friend kWh/kW, over the three month period 15 Aug to 15 Jan, where the denominator is the faceplate rating of the front side, I think. (They didn't say whether the numerator was AC or DC, but it's probably whatever solaredge's monitoring tells you.)

    I wonder what panels are on the market that can compete. Supposedly SolarWorld Bisun panels were on sale in June in Australia, maybe they'd do. I wonder if LG got their hands on some to test before issuing this challenge.
  • J.P.M.
    Solar Fanatic
    • Aug 2013
    • 14926

    #2
    That's a lot to comply with, and a lot of loop holes and unverifiable requirements for a relatively small prize, which prize also looks like it is to be split among winners.

    I'd suggest that if the goal is to prove (or find) max. output per kW (and different from most output/A$ invested, which IMO is being deflected/ignored a bit here), the competition might be opened up to other panel/inverter combinations. Max. output/installed kW is not usually the name of the game for most homeowners. Long term cost of ownership of a PV system compared to the cost of alternate means of meeting the duty is.

    Also, seems to me to be too many uncontrollable variables (wind and albedo to name but two) to make a valid comparison unless actual side/side or in a lab. Looks more like marketing hype than useful from where I sit.

    Comment

    • Sunking
      Solar Fanatic
      • Feb 2010
      • 23301

      #3
      A simple PR stunt with no teeth Dan feel for again. As JPM states $25K is not enough money to make anyone interested.
      MSEE, PE

      Comment

      • DanKegel
        Banned
        • Sep 2014
        • 2093

        #4
        Yeah, looks like cheap advertising, but it's at least an objective claim.

        Restricting it to just one popular brand of inverter gets rid of one of those uncontrollable variables you mentioned.

        Comment

        • J.P.M.
          Solar Fanatic
          • Aug 2013
          • 14926

          #5
          Originally posted by DanKegel
          Yeah, looks like cheap advertising, but it's at least an objective claim.

          Restricting it to just one popular brand of inverter gets rid of one of those uncontrollable variables you mentioned.
          So, you're shilling again for, to use your words., peddlers who resort to "cheap advertising" ? Looks typical for you from where I sit. You have little, if any notion of what's involved in a meaningful analysis and why your linked stuff is B.S.

          Dan, this is an example of just one of the things you do that, IMO, seems inconsiderate of others who may be ignorant but come here and other places looking for useful information, read your rebroadcasts of what seems to fit your agenda, and a good example of your lack of thought and how your lack of subject knowledge can do harm to attempts at objective analysis. More loose cannon stuff.

          Get off the bifacial bandwagon. It is of questionable benefit, both in terms of output enhancement and added economic value even in specialized applications for lots of reasons you're ignorant of.

          As far as I'm concerned, you've demonstrated no knowledge and background about solar energy, not to mention instrumentation and the knowledge of what's required to gather meaningful data to investigate or verify either any output enhancement (or decrement) or added economic benefit.

          Keep spreading the B.S. I'll keep calling it that when I see it.

          Comment

          • DanKegel
            Banned
            • Sep 2014
            • 2093

            #6
            Yeah, that ad *should* have mentioned that the panel's extra cost is worth it only if the panels are high enough to have lots of indirect light on their undersides.
            But in those situations, I don't think there's any question that the panels will provide more output than monofacial panels of the same front-side rating.
            It comes down to whether it's cost effective, which depends on price.

            Was there anything objectively inaccurate in my post? If so, I'll gladly correct it. if not, I'm not sure what you're objecting to.
            Objecting to a commercially available solar panel just because somebody might pick the wrong panel for the job seems a little picky.

            Comment

            • J.P.M.
              Solar Fanatic
              • Aug 2013
              • 14926

              #7
              Originally posted by DanKegel
              Yeah, that ad *should* have mentioned that the panel's extra cost is worth it only if the panels are high enough to have lots of indirect light on their undersides.
              But in those situations, I don't think there's any question that the panels will provide more output than monofacial panels of the same front-side rating.
              It comes down to whether it's cost effective, which depends on price.

              Was there anything objectively inaccurate in my post? If so, I'll gladly correct it. if not, I'm not sure what you're objecting to.
              Objecting to a commercially available solar panel just because somebody might pick the wrong panel for the job seems a little picky.
              IMO, what you post here is mostly misleading and a waste of time for others who read it and unwittingly think you know what you're writing about. Things are not as simple or as dichotomously absolute as you wish to imply. Your stuff is not all wrong or all right, just mostly trivial, and ignorant, and usually wrong headed and so, misleading for the most part.

              It would be better for all, IMO only, if you would stay out of things you are ignorant about, and that, IMO, includes most of R.E., and solar energy applications in particular. I'm not a crusader, but you, and others of your ilk, only do disservice to R.E. and make things more difficult for those of us who what to help others maybe get it right - the possibilities and limitations in equal measure.

              Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.
              Last edited by J.P.M.; 08-04-2016, 04:02 PM.

              Comment

              • DanKegel
                Banned
                • Sep 2014
                • 2093

                #8
                What in particular is misleading about this particular post?

                LG is definitely offering that panel for sale in Australia, and definitely offering that prize. You can take issue with LG, but not with the accuracy of my post.
                Last edited by DanKegel; 08-04-2016, 02:03 PM.

                Comment

                • SunEagle
                  Super Moderator
                  • Oct 2012
                  • 15125

                  #9
                  Originally posted by DanKegel
                  What in particular is misleading about this particular post?

                  LG is definitely offering that panel for sale in Australia, and definitely offering that prize. You can take issue with LG, but not with the accuracy of my post.
                  What is misleading is that the post may get someone very excited into believing they could get a big cash reward from a major player even though it really is nothing more than a big advertising PR event to drum up sales.

                  What I see around Florida are those small signs that advertise "free solar power", which is pure BS. There is nothing free about purchasing a solar pv system here in Florida because you can't even lease one but must purchase it and then hopefully get some type of payback in 10 to 15 years.

                  What the advertisement is not saying is that while the power generated from the sun may be "free" the equipment that is going to generate it is going to cost you a pretty penny.

                  Comment

                  • DanKegel
                    Banned
                    • Sep 2014
                    • 2093

                    #10
                    Seems like that's objecting to solar power in general, then...?

                    Comment

                    • SunEagle
                      Super Moderator
                      • Oct 2012
                      • 15125

                      #11
                      Originally posted by DanKegel
                      Seems like that's objecting to solar power in general, then...?
                      No. I am just against false advertising that lures people to make stupid decisions.

                      Hey want to buy a bridge or ocean front property in Arizona?

                      Comment

                      • DanKegel
                        Banned
                        • Sep 2014
                        • 2093

                        #12
                        In what way was this advertising false? It may not be complete, but I don't see it saying anything false.

                        Comment

                        • SunEagle
                          Super Moderator
                          • Oct 2012
                          • 15125

                          #13
                          Originally posted by DanKegel
                          In what way was this advertising false? It may not be complete, but I don't see it saying anything false.
                          Maybe not false but certainly a little misleading.

                          Comment

                          • DanKegel
                            Banned
                            • Sep 2014
                            • 2093

                            #14
                            I'm against false advertising, too.

                            I don't think the ad I linked to lures anybody to do anything stupid. It's effectively an invitation for anyone who *already has competing panels installed* to compare output, isn't it? (I doubt very much anyone is going to change the panels they install in the next two weeks as a result of the ad.)

                            Comment

                            • SunEagle
                              Super Moderator
                              • Oct 2012
                              • 15125

                              #15
                              Look. You asked what is misleading about that add and I answered. That is my opinion but maybe not the opinion of others. So let it go.

                              Comment

                              Working...